This story is from May 06, 2021
'Unconstitutional' Maratha quota quashed by court
In a setback to the Maharashtra government, the Supreme Court on Wednesday declared the state law to grant reservation to Maratha community as unconstitutional and held that the community is not socially and educationally backward to be eligible to be brought within the ambit of affirmative action.
A five-judge Constitution bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, L Nageswara Rao, S Abdul Nazeer, Hemant Gupta and S Ravindra Bhat was unanimous in its view on the unconstitutionality of the law and quashed it on various grounds, including breaching of the 50% quota rule.
The SC rued that even after 70 years of Independence, more and more people and communities are vying to be declared as "backward" to get reservation benefits.
The decision will cause disquiet in the politically influential community and put the Shiv Sena-led government in a spot even as it will most likely look for avenues to appeal. However, the ruling is unlikely to be altered, and the law — brought in by the previous BJP-Sena government — is likely to remain a non-starter.
Ironically, it is Sena, which will have to deal with the political hot potato. The state had framed the law on November 30, 2018 granting 16% quota for Marathas in government jobs and admission in educational institutions in response to a sustained agitation. While upholding the law, the Bombay high court on June 27, 2019, directed the government to bring it down to 12% for education and 13% for jobs as recommended by a state-appointed backward class commission.
But on examining all data pertaining to social, educational and political status of Marathas in the state, the SC, in its judgment, said both the HC and the Commission erred in concluding that they are a backward community. The SC also noted that majority of the legislature belongs to the Marathas —out of 19 CMs, 13 were from the community.
“The representation of Marathas in public services in Grade A, B, C and D comes to 33.23%, 29.03%, 37.06% and 36.53%, computed from out of the open category filled posts, and is adequate representation of the community. One community bagging such number of posts in public services is a matter of pride for the community and its representation in no manner can be said to be not adequate in public services,” Justice Bhushan said in his order.
The SC, however, made it clear people who availed of
A five-judge Constitution bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, L Nageswara Rao, S Abdul Nazeer, Hemant Gupta and S Ravindra Bhat was unanimous in its view on the unconstitutionality of the law and quashed it on various grounds, including breaching of the 50% quota rule.
The decision will cause disquiet in the politically influential community and put the Shiv Sena-led government in a spot even as it will most likely look for avenues to appeal. However, the ruling is unlikely to be altered, and the law — brought in by the previous BJP-Sena government — is likely to remain a non-starter.
Ironically, it is Sena, which will have to deal with the political hot potato. The state had framed the law on November 30, 2018 granting 16% quota for Marathas in government jobs and admission in educational institutions in response to a sustained agitation. While upholding the law, the Bombay high court on June 27, 2019, directed the government to bring it down to 12% for education and 13% for jobs as recommended by a state-appointed backward class commission.
“The representation of Marathas in public services in Grade A, B, C and D comes to 33.23%, 29.03%, 37.06% and 36.53%, computed from out of the open category filled posts, and is adequate representation of the community. One community bagging such number of posts in public services is a matter of pride for the community and its representation in no manner can be said to be not adequate in public services,” Justice Bhushan said in his order.
The SC, however, made it clear people who availed of
Maratha quota
in government jobs and admission in educational institutions during pendency of the case will not be affected.Top Comment
Vivek Buzruk
1294 days ago
I do not understand why this reservation required & why it is scrapped, but definitely I am curious. Well, my son and daughter are done quite ok in respective open category. But in general, with good & bad experience in last 45 years of life (from the time I heard word Reservation) I was always for reservation of certain sections of society. My mother was a teacher and though we came from Brahmin family parents respected everyone from society.Read allPost comment
Popular from India
- Rift in MVA? It's Sanjay Raut vs Nana Patole over CM face in Maharashtra
- Decoding US charges against Gautam Adani and others: 10 points
- After five-day 'severe' spell, city's air quality improves to 'very poor'
- 'Even Kasab got fair trial': SC says can set up temporary court in Tihar for Yasin
- Maharashtra exit poll results 2024: Two more pollsters predict victory for Mahayuti
end of article
Trending Stories
- ICC warrant for Netanyahu: US fundamentally rejects ruling; EU says decision binding
- Cassie's post-assault chat with Diddy reveals disturbing details: 'You hit me in the head two good times'
- Matt Gaetz withdraws as Trump's pick for attorney general
- Big escalation: 'Russia launches ICBM strike' against Ukraine, shoots down UK Storm Shadow missiles
- 'War crimes': ICC issues arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant; Israeli PM rejects ruling with 'disgust'
- Pakistan gun attack: Gunmen open fire on passenger vehicles killing at least 50 people in Kurram district
- Putin says Russia hit Ukraine with new new hypersonic ballistic missile, warns US, UK
Visual Stories
- 10 easy South Indian snacks for Friday evenings
- 7 genetic traits that babies get from their dad
- 10 good habits of parents that make kids disciplined
- 7 low-maintenance animals to keep as pets
- 10 Korean dishes that are getting popular in India
TOP TRENDS
UP NEXT